REG - Kefi Gold and Copper - Maiden Al Godeyer Resource
03/04/2023 07:15
For best results when printing this announcement, please click on link below:
http://newsfile.refinitiv.com/getnewsfile/v1/story?guid=urn:newsml:reuters.com:20230403:nRSC0426Va&default-theme=true
RNS Number : 0426V Kefi Gold and Copper PLC 03 April 2023
3 April 2023
KEFI Gold and Copper plc
("KEFI" or the "Company")
Maiden Al Godeyer Resource to contribute to the Hawiah Project Open Pittable
Resources
KEFI Gold and Copper (AIM: KEFI), the gold and copper exploration and
development company with projects in the Federal Democratic Republic of
Ethiopia and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, is pleased to present the maiden
Mineral Resource Estimate ("MRE") at the Al Godeyer Project ("Al Godeyer" or
the "Project"), which forms part of the Hawiah Complex, all part of KEFI's
Saudi Arabian joint-venture Gold and Minerals Company Limited ("GMCO").
In Saudi Arabia, the Jibal Qutman Gold Project ("Jibal Qutman"), the Hawiah
Copper-Gold Project ("Hawiah") and the other Saudi projects are under GMCO
(now planned to be 25-30% owned by KEFI). In Ethiopia, the Tulu Kapi Gold
Project is under TKGM (now planned to be 70-80% owned by KEFI). Final
beneficial ownership will depend on project financing requirements.
Highlights
· Maiden Al Godeyer Inferred Open-Pit Mineral Resource Estimate of 1.35
million tonnes ("Mt") at 0.6% copper, 0.54% zinc, 1.4g/t gold and 6.6g/t
silver potentially complements the Inferred Resources reported for the
Open-Pit Scenario at the nearby Hawiah deposit of 11.1Mt, as announced by KEFI
on 9 January 2023.
· Al Godyer continues to be open at depth and along strike
· This reaffirms the potential for an initial open-pit mining operation
at Hawiah as does early oxide metallurgical testwork which indicates that the
Al Godeyer ore can be processed at the Hawiah plant located 12km from the
site.
· Drilling planned to commence in Q2 2023 will be aimed at converting
unclassified areas of the deposit to the Inferred category and to further test
the strike extent of the orebody.
· Concurrent drilling planned at Hawiah will focus on upgrading and
further expanding its total resources reported on 9 January 2023 of 29.0 Mt at
0.89% copper, 0.94% zinc, 0.67 g/t gold and 10.1 g/t silver.
Harry Anagnostaras-Adams, Executive Chairman of KEFI, commented:
"This Al Godeyer maiden copper-zinc-gold-silver Mineral Resource has confirmed
the clear potential to support the Hawiah project, at this stage lifting to
over 12Mt the total tonnage being considered for the Open-Pit Scenario.
"Feedback from the early metallurgical testwork is particularly exciting and
demonstrates the amenability of Al Godeyer to provide additional open pit feed
material to the proposed Hawiah Complex.
"The work completed at Al Godeyer further demonstrates our ability to discover
and rapidly advance projects in our ever-growing exploration portfolio within
the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, with the GMCO team taking the Al Godeyer target
from a mineral occurrence to a JORC compliant resource in a little over a
year.
"Elsewhere within the Kingdom, the Jibal Qutman project is advancing on
schedule with our aim to start construction by the end of 2023. The Hawiah
Pre-feasibility Study is currently being finalised and drilling is set to
shortly recommence on the Hawiah site. This drilling is primarily focused on
converting Inferred Resources to the Indicated category, but is also aiming at
extending the planned mine life by further increasing the Hawiah Mineral
Resource in a few key areas.
"KEFI has very exciting growth prospects in both Saudi Arabia and in Ethiopia,
where our working environments have improved enormously over the past 18
months."
Background
Since the commencement of major exploration works at Al Godeyer in early 2022,
the GMCO exploration team has undertaken mapping, trenching, and a
Self-Potential ("SP") geophysical survey along with diamond and reverse
circulation ("RC") drilling programmes. Completing 3,007m of diamond
drilling and 1,169m of RC drilling, for a total of 4,176m of drilling.
The drilling and trenching had three main objectives:
- Testing the volcanogenic massive sulphide ("VMS") geological model
at the surface and depth;
- Understanding the geometry and grade characteristics of the ore
body; and
- Increasing geological and grade confidence in the deposit to a
level sufficient for resource estimation and reporting.
These objectives have been achieved and with the deposit remaining open along
strike to the southeast and at depth, there is considerable opportunity to
further expand resources.
Following the completion of the drilling programme GMCO appointed The MSA
Group (Pty) Ltd ("MSA") as the Independent Consultants and Competent Person to
prepare a maiden MRE for Al Godeyer in accordance with the Australasian Code
for the Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves
("JORC Code 2012"). These estimation works included a site visit by the MSA
competent person.
Al Godeyer Work Programme for 2023
Looking forward to 2023, further diamond drilling and additional trenching is
being planned to upgrade the 'unclassified areas' of the deposit to the
Inferred category. In addition to this, further metallurgical test work will
be undertaken. If results are in line with expectations, then additional
drilling will be planned to upgrade the Resource to the Indicated
classification for use in the Hawiah Complex Definitive Feasibility Study
("DFS") and Reserve calculations.
Maiden Al Godeyer MRE
The maiden MRE for the Al Godeyer deposit is detailed in Table 1 below and now
totals:
- 1.35 Mt at 0.6% copper, 0.54% zinc, 1.40 g/t gold and 6.6 g/t
silver.
Based on this MRE, the Al Godeyer deposit is estimated to contain a total of
8,100 tonnes or 17.9 million lbs of copper, 7,200 tonnes or 15.9 million lbs
of zinc, 60,400 gold ounces and 284,600 silver ounces.
Table 1 : MSA Minerals Resource Statement for Al Godeyer,
Effective Date 27 March 2023 (see notes 1 to 7)
Class Mining Type Material Type Tonnes (Mt) Grade Metal Content
Cu Zn Au Ag Cu Zn Au Ag
(%) (%) (g/t) (g/t) (kt) (kt) (koz) (koz)
Inferred Open Pit Oxide 0.24 0 0 2.06 1.41 0 0 16.0 11.0
Transition 0.26 0.54 0.11 1.34 4.90 1.4 0.3 11.0 40.2
Fresh 0.85 0.79 0.82 1.22 8.63 6.7 6.9 33.4 235.3
Total Inferred Open Pit All 1.35 0.60 0.54 1.40 6.60 8.1 7.2 60.4 286.6
Total Resource Open Pit All 1.35 0.6 0.54 1.40 6.60 8.1 7.2 60.4 286.6
Notes on MSA Resource statement:
(1) koz = one thousand ounces, kt = one thousand metric tonnes, Mt = one
million metric tonnes.
(2) All tabulated data have been rounded and as a result minor computational
errors may occur.
(3) Mineral Resources, which are not Mineral Reserves, have no demonstrated
economic viability.
(4) The Gross Mineral Resource for the Project is reported.
(5) The Mineral Resource is reported in accordance with the guidelines of the
2012 Edition of The Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results,
Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves ('the JORC Code').
(6) A Whittle optimised pit shell was used to report open-pit Mineral
Resources. The Whittle optimisation was based on the following assumed
technical parameters:
- Pit slope angle: Fresh 56°, Transition 51° and Oxide: 44°.
- Dilution of 10% and mining recovery of 95%.
- Concentrator Recovery via an Albion circuit: Cu 90%, Zn 90%, Au
85%, Ag 60% No recovery of zinc and copper in oxide. Metallurgical factors
based on initial metallurgical test-work.
Cost and revenue assumptions:
- Metal Prices: copper 9350 USD/t, zinc 3300 USD/t, gold 1820
USD/oz, silver 26 USD/oz.
- Smelter recovery/payability: copper 96.5%, zinc 83.5%. gold Dore -
gold 99.5%, silver 99.6%.
- Mining cost: open pit oxide 2.2 US$/t, open pit transition and
fresh 2.4 US$/t. Transport to Hawiah plant 1.125 US$/t and rehandling cost of
0.7 US$/t. Cost adjustment for open-pit depth US$0.004 / vertical m.
- Total Processing cost: oxide 13.9 US$/t, transition and fresh 21.4
US$/t.
- G&A: 5.6 US$/t ore.
(7) The cut-off grade was applied on a net smelter return (NSR) basis:
open-pit transition and fresh ore 31.2 US$/t, open-pit oxide ore 23.5 US$/t.
NSR was calculated for each block model cell using the following formulae:
Oxide = (copper %*0)+(zinc %*0)+(gold g/t 49.4732 )+(silver g/t*0.4868)
Transition and Fresh = (copper %*76.5870)+(zinc %*20.1118)+(gold g/t
*49.4732)+(silver g/t*0.4868)
The MRE is based on 4,176 metres of diamond drilling and RC completed since
March 2022 and is reported in accordance with the Australasian Code for the
Reporting of Exploration Targets, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves, The JORC
Code (2012).
Trenching, supported by surface diamond and RC drilling has consistently
intersected copper-zinc-gold-silver mineralisation contained within gossanous
ex-massive and semi-massive sulphides at surface and massive and semi-massive
sulphides at depth, over 1.3 kilometres of strike length.
The Al Godeyer deposit has only been drill tested to a vertical depth of 200
metres below the surface and it remains open at depth and along strike to the
southeast.
Market Abuse Regulation (MAR) Disclosure
This announcement contains inside information for the purposes of Article 7 of
the Market Abuse Regulation (EU) 596/2014 as it forms part of UK domestic law
by virtue of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 ("MAR"), and is
disclosed in accordance with the Company's obligations under Article 17 of
MAR.
Enquiries
KEFI Gold and Copper plc
Harry Anagnostaras-Adams (Managing Director) +357 99457843
John Leach (Finance Director) +357 99208130
SP Angel Corporate Finance LLP (Nominated Adviser and Joint Broker) +44 (0) 20 3470 0470
Jeff Keating, Adam Cowl
Tavira Securities Limited (Joint Broker) +44 (0) 20 7100 5100
Oliver Stansfield, Jonathan Evans
WH Ireland Limited (Joint Broker) +44 (0) 20 7220 1666
Katy Mitchell, Andrew de Andrade
IFC Advisory Ltd (Financial PR and IR)
Tim Metcalfe, Florence Chandler +44 (0) 20 3934 6630
Competent Person Statement
The Hawiah Mineral Resource estimate was completed by Mr Jeremy Charles Witley
(BSc Hons, MSc (Eng.)) who is a geologist with 34 years of experience in base
and precious metals exploration and mining as well as Mineral Resource
evaluation and reporting. He is a Principal Mineral Resource Consultant for
The MSA Group (an independent consulting company). He is registered with the
South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions ("SACNASP"), is a
Fellow of the Geological Society of South Africa ("GSSA") and a Fellow of the
Professional Society of Independent Experts of the Subsurface Resources
("PONEN"), Kazakhstan. Mr Witley has the appropriate relevant qualifications
and experience to be considered a "Competent Person" as defined by JORC (2012)
for the style and type of mineralisation and activity being undertaken.
The information in this announcement that relates to exploration results is
based on information compiled by Mr Tomos Bryan, Exploration Manager for GMCO.
Mr Bryan is a member of the AusIMM. Mr Bryan is a geologist with sufficient
relevant experience for Company reporting to qualify as a Competent Person as
defined in the JORC Code 2012. Mr Bryan consents to the inclusion in this
announcement of the matters based on this information in the form and context
in which it appears.
Notes to Editor
KEFI Gold and Copper plc
KEFI is focused primarily on the development of the Tulu Kapi Gold Project in
Ethiopia and its pipeline of highly prospective exploration and development
projects in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, also in the Arabian-Nubian Shield.
KEFI targets that Tulu Kapi Gold, along with its two most advanced Saudi
projects Jibal Qutman Gold and Hawiah Copper-Gold will come into production
over the period 2025-2027 and will generate cash flows for capital repayments,
further exploration and dividends to shareholders.
APPENDIX A
Additional Background information on the Al Godeyer deposit
The Al Godeyer deposit is located within the Wadi Bidah Mineral District
("WBMD") in the southwest of the Arabian Shield. The WBMD is a
120-kilometre-long belt which hosts over 20 Volcanic Massive Sulphide ("VMS")
known occurrences and historic workings for copper and gold.
The Al Godeyer project is located 12km east of the company's flagship Hawiah
project which hosts a mineral resource of 29.0 Mt at 0.89% copper, 0.94% zinc,
0.67 g/t gold and 10.1 g/t silver.
GMCO commenced drilling at Al Godeyer in March 2022 and quickly confirmed that
the VMS style of mineralisation underlies the gossanous ridgeline at the
surface.
A total of 16 diamond drillholes, 19 reverse circulation drillholes and 25
trenches have led to the definition of a copper-zinc-gold-silver massive
sulphide lode that remains open at depth and along strike to the southeast
(see Figure 3 in Appendix C).
The deepest massive sulphide intersection at Al Godeyer is at a vertical depth
of 200m where 3.3m true width of massive sulphide was intersected. The average
true width of Al Godeyer is 4.5m with the widest intersection of 7.5m found at
a depth of 20m.
Drilling spans over 1km of strike length at a drill spacing of approximately
100m or less for areas reporting to Inferred classification.
Summary of Resource Estimate Parameters and Reporting Criteria
In accordance with the JORC Code (2012 Edition), a summary of the material
information used to estimate the Mineral Resource is detailed below (for
further information please refer to Table 1 in Appendix F).
Geology and Geological Interpretation
The Al Godeyer VMS deposit is located on the western limb of a regional-scale
antiform within the locally known, 'Group 3' volcanoclastic and epiclastic
units of the Wadi Bidah Mineral Belt.
The Al Godeyer deposit is expressed at surface by a northwest-southeast
trending gossan that forms a slight ridgeline exposed over a length of
approximately 1,000 m, with a thickness that typically varies from 2m to 13m.
The gossan outcrop strikes approximately west to east for a further 300m in
the southern area, and a fault has been interpreted to explain the sudden
strike change. Away from this main deposit area, the gossan horizon can be
traced discontinuously along strike for an additional 800m.
The ridge has been interpreted by GMCO as the modern-day expression of the
original VMS palaeohorizon with varying degrees of remobilised sulphides. The
rock package comprises a suite of gossanous ex-massive sulphides, chert
breccias, banded ironstones and sulphide-rich epiclastics. The deposit has
been subject to varying degrees of the supergene alteration as a result of
groundwater interactions.
The deposit comprises three weathering/alteration domains; Oxide,
Transitional, and Fresh, within which different resulting facies are
described. The oxide and transition domains typically show supergene gold
enrichment and copper depletion. The fresh mineralised domain appears to be a
dominantly pyritic stratiform semi-massive to massive sulphide body.
The Oxide domain mineralisation at the Al Godeyer is a combination of gossan,
saccharoidal silica and haematitic cherts derived from leaching of the
semi-massive to massive sulphide deposit. Higher-grade gold mineralisation is
typically associated with saccharoidal silica facies, similar to the Hawiah
deposit.
In the Transition domain, mineralisation is typically characterised by its
dark grey to black colour due to patrial oxidation of the semi-massive to
massive sulphide. The base of the transition zone is predominantly defined by
the observed sulphide state, where dark grey altered sulphides become yellow
un-oxidised massive pyrite at depth. Transition material is analogous to that
of the Hawiah deposit albeit without a noticeable enrichment in copper.
Petrographic studies on drillcore from the Fresh domain have shown that the
majority of the sulphides have undergone a degree of recrystallisation. This
is in contrast to the Hawiah deposit where sulphide textures indicate the
massive sulphide ore body is relatively undisturbed. The remobilisation and
recrystallisation of sulphides at Al Godeyer are interpreted to have occurred
due to regional metamorphism to amphibolite facies followed by retrograde
metamorphism to greenschist and local emplacement of granodiorite intrusions.
This remobilisation and recrystallisation have resulted in a semi-massive to
massive sulphide ore body with between 10-60% pyrite unlike Hawiah which
typically contains >80% pyrite. Due to the continuity of the orebody and no
evidence of a feeder structure it appears the remobilisation likely occurred
locally within the original paleohorizon.
The central portion of the deposit is the thickest and contains mineralisation
elevated in gold, copper, zinc and silver, which extends 300m to 400m along
strike and extends to at least 200m below surface. The northwest and southeast
areas have not been tested below the oxide and transition domains.
Sampling Techniques and Hole Spacing
A total of 16 diamond drillholes (3,007), 19 reverse circulation drillholes
(4,167) and 25 trenches (1,022) have been used for this Mineral Resource
Estimate. Drillhole spacing for trenching is approximately 100m (Inferred
classification). Drilling spacing across all three domains is typically 120m
(Indicated classification).
Drillholes were logged for a combination of geological and geotechnical
attributes. The core has been photographed and measured for RQD and core
recovery.
Sampling and Sub-Sampling Techniques
Diamond drilling and surface trenching were used to obtain sample intervals
that typically range from 0.3-3m for drilling, and 1-3m for reverse
circulation drilling and trenching.
The whole diamond core was split using a core saw by GMCO personnel and then
submitted for preparation at ALS Jeddah, during which material was crushed to
2mm, pulverised to ~75µm, with 250g split sent for analysis. The sample
preparation procedures used for reverse circulation and trench samples are
consistent with the drillcore samples.
The mineralised interval for all sample types was continuously sampled from
hangingwall to footwall, which included samples a short distance into the
hangingwall and footwall.
Sampling Analysis Method
Samples have undergone analysis at the ALS Laboratory, located in Jeddah.,
Saudi Arabia.
- Gold - Fire assay digest with AAS instrumentation
- Copper, Zinc, Silver: Four acid digest ICP-AES
QAQC
QAQC procedures include:
- Insertion of CRM standards, certified blanks, and field duplicates
at a rate of 15% (5% each)
- Monthly internal QAQC reporting
- Regular communication with the laboratory, including periodical
lab inspections.
Estimation Methodology
In summary, for this Mineral Resource Estimate, the following approach has
been utilised:
• modelling of the mineralised lode and weathering
domains in 3D, in conjunction with the GMCO geological team;
• composited the sample data to 1m intervals using
length and density (assigned by rock type) weighting;
• applied high-grade caps per estimation domain from
outlier analysis;
• undertaken geostatistical analyses to determine
appropriate interpolation parameters;
• created a block model that was rotated 49° into
the dominant strike direction with parent block dimensions of 12.5m (strike) x
2m (across strike) x 5m (dip), sub-blocked to a fraction of parent cell of ¼
(strike) x ⅛ (across strike) x ¼ (dip);
• interpolated copper, zinc, gold and silver grades
into the block model using ordinary kriging;
• assigned density values by weathering domain; and
• visually and statistically validated the estimated
block grades relative to the original sample results.
Classification Criteria
The Al Godeyer resource has been classified in the Inferred Mineral Resource
classification category, as defined by JORC 2012.
Mineral Resource Statement Parameters and Cut-off Grade
MSA has applied basic economic considerations based on initial metallurgical
testwork results and assumptions provided by the Company, similar deposit
types located within Saudi Arabia and MSA's experience to determine which
portion of the block model has reasonable prospects for eventual economic
extraction by underground and open-pit mining methods.
To achieve this, the Mineral Resource has been subject to open-pit
optimisation studies, based on long-term metal price forecasts (with
appropriate uplift to reflect the potential for assessing Mineral Resources)
for copper, zinc, gold and silver, to assist in determining the material with
potential for underground and open pit mining and reporting above a suitable
Resource Net Smelter Return ("NSR") USD/t cut-off value ("Resource NSR").
The Resource NSR cut-off calculation has been determined based on metal price
forecasts, initial metallurgical recovery results and assumptions, mining
costs, processing costs, general and administrative (G&A) costs, and other
NSR factors. The final Resource NSR value calculation is based on average
assumptions for the deposit and applied to the block model using the following
formulae:
Resource NSR (USD) value for oxide material = (CU_PCT*0) + (ZN_PCT*0) +
(AU_PPM*49.4732) + (AG_PPM*0.4868)
Resource NSR (USD) value for transition and fresh material = (CU_PCT*76.5870)
+ (ZN_PCT*20.1118) + (AU_PPM*49.4732) + (AG_PPM*0.4868)
The cut-off values determined for reporting the Mineral Resource on a Resource
NSR USD/t basis, are given below and were based on the technical and economic
inputs presented in Table 3 below:
- USD23.49/t for open pit material reported from within the oxide
mineralisation domain;
- USD31.23/t for open pit material reported from within the
transition and fresh mineralisation domains; and
Table 3 - Summary of key assumptions for conceptual underground stope
optimisation, open pit optimisation and cut-off grade calculation
Parameters Units
Production Rate
Production Rate - Ore (mtpa) 1.35
Geotechnical
Overall Slope Angle (Oxide) (Deg) 44
Overall Slope Angle (Transition) (Deg) 51
Overall Slope Angle (Fresh) (Deg) 56
Open Pit Mining Factors
Dilution (%) Included in regularised Block Model 5x5x2.5 m
95
Recovery (%)
Processing (Oxide: Cyanide Leach)
Recovery - Cu (%) 0%
Recovery - Zn (%) 0%
Recovery - Au (%) 85%
Recovery - Ag (%) 60%
Processing (Transition and Fresh: Albion Circuit and Cyanide Leach)
Recovery - Cu (%) 90%
Recovery - Zn (%) 90%
Recovery - Au (%) 85%
Recovery - Ag (%) 60%
Commodity Prices
Cu (USD/t) 9,350
Zn (USD/t) 3,300
Au (USD/oz) 1,820
Ag (USD/oz) 26
Operating Costs
Open Pit Mining (Oxide Ore) (USD/t rock) 6.6
Open Pit Mining (Oxide Waste) (USD/t rock) 2.2
Open Pit Mining (Transition and Fresh Ore) (USD/t rock) 7.2
Open Pit Mining (Transition and Fresh Waste) (USD/t rock) 2.4
Processing (Oxide: Cyanide Leach) (USD/t ore) 13.86
Processing (Transition and Fresh: Albion Circuit Cyanide Leach) (USD/t ore) 21.40
G&A (incl. corporate, sales/ marketing) (USD/t ore) 5.6
Mining and Metallurgical Methods and Parameters
Initial metallurgical test work has been completed for the Oxide
mineralisation at Al Godeyer. This test work comprised comminution, cyanide
leach, thickening and filtration test work done at the South African
laboratories of Mealgwyn Mineral Services (Johannesburg) and Paterson &
Cooke (Cape town). Further test work which including floatation test work on
Transition and Fresh Ore has commenced and will be followed by Albion
Amenability testwork once the floatation test is complete. Once all testwork
is completed, if the metallurgical recovery results change significantly from
the current approximated values, this would impact the parameters used to
report the Mineral Resource, which, in turn, could also impact the tonnages
and grades considered to have 'reasonable prospects for eventual economic
extraction' for reporting in the Mineral Resource Statement.
Appendix B - Glossary of Technical Terms
Ag Silver
AAS Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy
AIC All-in Costs
Arabian-Nubian Shield or ANS The Arabian-Nubian Shield is a large area of Precambrian rocks in various
countries surrounding the Red Sea
ARTAR Abdul Rahman Saad Al Rashid & Sons Company Limited
Au Gold
Cu Copper
DFS Definitive Feasibility Study
g/t Grams per tonne
Gossan An iron-bearing weathered product overlying a sulphide deposit
ICP-AES Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectroscopy
IDW Inverse Distance Weighted
IP Induced polarisation - a ground-based geophysical survey technique measuring
the intensity of an induced electric current, used to identify disseminated
sulphide deposits
JORC Joint Ore Reserves Committee
JORC Code 2012 Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and
Ore Reserves
m Metres
Massive sulphide Rock comprised of more than 40% sulphide minerals
Mt Million tonnes
Mtpa Million tonnes per annum
MRE Mineral Resource Estimate
NSR Net Smelter Return
oz Troy ounce of gold
PCT Percent
PEA Preliminary Economic Assessment
PFS Pre-Feasibility Study
PPM Parts per million
Precambrian Era of geological time before the Cambrian, from approximately 4,600 to 542
million years ago
VMS deposits Volcanogenic massive sulphides; refers to massive sulphide deposits formed in
a volcanic environment with varying base metals (copper, lead and zinc) often
with significant additional gold and silver
Zn Zinc
Appendix C - Diagrams
The Appendix C diagrams may be accessed via the following link:
http://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/0426V_1-2023-4-2.pdf
(http://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/0426V_1-2023-4-2.pdf)
Appendix D - Collar Locations
Hole_ID Projection Utm Zone Utm Easting Utm_Northing Elevation Azimuth Dip Depth
AGTR_001 WGS84 37N 729086 2334417 1389 225 0 28
AGTR_002 WGS84 37N 729152 2334362 1394 225 0 37
AGTR_003 WGS84 37N 729228 2334307 1383 225 0 57
AGTR_004 WGS84 37N 729297 2334235 1380 225 0 45
AGTR_005 WGS84 37N 729361 2334165 1378 225 0 60
AGTR_006 WGS84 37N 729428 2334102 1376 225 0 35
AGTR_007 WGS84 37N 729518 2334043 1379 225 0 41
AGTR_008 WGS84 37N 729601 2333998 1392 225 0 40
AGTR_009 WGS84 37N 729665 2333916 1387 225 0 51
AGTR_010 WGS84 37N 729710 2333826 1386 225 0 38
AGTR_011 WGS84 37N 729809 2333788 1385 225 0 50
AGTR_012 WGS84 37N 729849 2333766 1384 155 0 39
AGTR_013 WGS84 37N 729900 2333793 1392 170 0 70
AGTR_014 WGS84 37N 729969 2333769 1390 195 0 55
AGTR_015 WGS84 37N 730022 2333764 1393 215 0 46
AGTR_016 WGS84 37N 730062 2333742 1395 210 0 40
AGTR_017 WGS84 37N 730094 2333716 1395 210 0 40
AGTR_018 WGS84 37N 730146 2333360 1423 360 0 38
AGTR_019 WGS84 37N 730173 2333367 1418 360 0 37
AGTR_020 WGS84 37N 730196 2333370 1412 360 0 29
AGTR_021 WGS84 37N 730238 2333385 1408 360 0 26
AGTR_022 WGS84 37N 730265 2333413 1404 180 0 34
AGTR_023 WGS84 37N 730290 2333388 1413 210 0 36
AGTR_024 WGS84 37N 730279 2333365 1420 210 0 17
AGTR_025 WGS84 37N 730666 2333861 1390 135 0 37
AGRC_001 WGS84 37N 729438 2334100 1377 225 -50 41
AGRC_002 WGS84 37N 729345 2334175 1379 225 -50 44
AGRC_003 WGS84 37N 729408 2334153 1377 225 -55 70
AGRC_004 WGS84 37N 729539 2334025 1382 225 -50 45
AGRC_005 WGS84 37N 729635 2333955 1391 225 -50 60
AGRC_006 WGS84 37N 729618 2334018 1397 225 -50 84
AGRC_007 WGS84 37N 729673 2333921 1390 225 -50 75
AGRC_008 WGS84 37N 729665 2333842 1386 45 -50 45
AGRC_009 WGS84 37N 729707 2333797 1383 45 -50 56
AGRC_010 WGS84 37N 729779 2333791 1387 45 -50 60
AGRC_011 WGS84 37N 729816 2333775 1384 180 -50 48
AGRC_012 WGS84 37N 729875 2333799 1394 180 -50 93
AGRC_013 WGS84 37N 729498 2334081 1379 225 -50 85
AGRC_014 WGS84 37N 729318 2334232 1382 225 -50 74
AGRC_015 WGS84 37N 729265 2334262 1382 225 -50 50
AGRC_016 WGS84 37N 729241 2334324 1388 225 -50 75
AGRC_017 WGS84 37N 729174 2334344 1390 225 -50 42
AGRC_018 WGS84 37N 729142 2334397 1399 225 -50 72
AGRC_019 WGS84 37N 729091 2334414 1392 225 -50 50
AGDD_001 WGS84 37N 729746 2334000 1393 225 -55 302.5
AGDD_002 WGS84 37N 729692 2334094 1385 225 -55 281.5
AGDD_003 WGS84 37N 729589 2334173 1379 225 -55 269.5
AGDD_004 WGS84 37N 729322 2334405 1384 225 -55 215.5
AGDD_005 WGS84 37N 729412 2334326 1384 225 -55 221.5
AGDD_006 WGS84 37N 729931 2333867 1395 225 -55 212.5
AGDD_007 WGS84 37N 729820 2333936 1399 225 -55 220
AGDD_008 WGS84 37N 729676 2333999 1396 225 -55 215.5
AGDD_009 WGS84 37N 729591 2334078 1386 225 -55 140.5
AGDD_010 WGS84 37N 729457 2334211 1376 225 -55 128.5
AGDD_011 WGS84 37N 729651 2333971 1395 225 -55 257
AGDD_012 WGS84 37N 729603 2334003 1394 225 -55 58.5
AGDD_013B WGS84 37N 729746 2333929 1406 225 -55 230.5
AGDD_014 WGS84 37N 729560 2334050 1386 225 -55 83.1
AGDD_015 WGS84 37N 729476 2334065 1377 225 -55 40
AGDD_016 WGS84 37N 729503 2334160 1378 155 -55 130.5
Appendix E - Results
Hole_ID Depth From To Intercept Cu% Zn% Au ppm Ag ppm
AGTR_001 28 13 19.2 6.2 0.13 0.05 0.35 0.17
AGTR_002 37 15.5 17 1.5 0.19 0.02 1.06 0.09
AGTR_003 57 19 27.4 8.4 0.19 0.01 0.35 0.00
AGTR_004 45 22 26 4 0.18 0.01 0.76 0.00
AGTR_005 60 20 27.5 7.5 0.16 0.01 2.65 0.12
AGTR_006 35 12.5 15 2.5 0.15 0.02 1.70 0.22
AGTR_007 41 18.75 24.2 5.45 0.19 0.04 18.90 1.42
AGTR_008 40 18.75 24 5.25 0.56 0.12 1.59 1.04
AGTR_009 51 13 23 10 0.17 0.09 1.50 1.08
AGTR_010 38 20 25 5 0.36 0.35 0.64 0.70
AGTR_011 50 18 21 3 0.08 0.06 1.95 0.00
34.3 36.5 2.2 0.25 0.11 0.47 0.39
AGTR_012 39 10.9 14.3 3.4 0.36 0.21 1.67 2.64
15 19 4 0.38 0.11 0.41 1.14
AGTR_013 70 30 33 3 0.16 0.12 1.17 0.50
38 46.6 8.6 0.23 0.10 0.85 1.19
AGTR_014 55 8 11 3 1.14 0.23 4.65 1.92
17 19.85 2.85 1.32 0.47 2.44 2.76
AGTR_015 46 10.6 12 1.4 0.19 0.06 0.66 1.21
18 19.6 1.6 0.41 0.38 1.47 1.04
AGTR_016 40 13.75 15 1.25 0.09 0.04 0.24 0.00
16 17 1 0.43 0.17 0.32 0.25
AGTR_017 40 Non-Mineralised
AGTR_018 38 9.1 9.45 0.35 0.05 0 3.22 1
AGTR_019 37 9.4 10 0.6 1.07 0.38 1.17 0.5
AGTR_020 29 8 9 1 0.58 0.09 0.25 1.43
AGTR_021 26 7 8 1 0.67 0.14 0.91 0.9
AGTR_022 34 18 20 2 1.46 0.11 0.7 0.78
AGTR_023 36 7 10 3 0.23 0.03 0.52 1.12
AGTR_024 17 12.3 13 0.7 0.34 0.05 0.46 0.71
AGTR_025 37 Non-Mineralised
AGRC_001 41 14 20 6 0.12 0.04 1.39 0.25
AGRC_002 44 18 22 4 0.16 0.01 4.99 0.30
AGRC_003 70 37 40 3 0.63 0.08 0.70 1.57
AGRC_004 45 18 28 10 0.27 0.15 1.34 1.40
AGRC_005 60 26 38 12 0.07 0.11 5.86 3.17
AGRC_006 84 59 65 6 1.79 0.21 5.22 78.77
AGRC_007 75 38 52 14 0.03 0.04 4.88 12.38
AGRC_008 45 5 11 6 0.37 0.52 0.48 2.03
14 18 4 0.24 0.16 0.86 3.43
AGRC_009 56 17 20 3 0.17 0.17 0.63 1.97
39 53 14 0.46 0.30 0.45 3.07
AGRC_010 60 16 18 2 0.21 0.19 0.10 0.00
26 32 6 0.51 0.13 3.97 4.58
AGRC_011 48 6 17 11 0.14 0.10 0.92 2.65
34 36 2 0.31 0.10 0.92 6.75
AGRC_012 93 40 44 4 0.56 0.23 1.68 6.98
57 60 3 0.20 0.20 0.81 1.90
AGRC_013 85 42 45 3 1.03 0.02 0.87 5.90
AGRC_014 74 36 38 2 0.34 0.03 0.56 0.75
AGRC_015 50 17 20 3 0.28 0.01 0.62 0.00
AGRC_016 75 47 54 7 0.63 0.01 1.55 3.54
AGRC_017 42 15 18 3 0.60 0.03 0.38 0.33
AGRC_018 72 47 49 2 0.51 0.07 0.17 1.10
AGRC_019 50 22 23 1 0.25 0.02 0.29 1.10
AGDD_001 302.5 239.22 244.6 5.38 0.44 0.21 0.50 3.29
AGDD_002 281.5 250.9 255.3 4.4 0.90 1.21 1.91 12.68
AGDD_003 269.5 184.5 187.3 2.8 1.49 0.65 0.91 15.18
AGDD_004 215.5 167.9 169.34 1.44 2.55 0.10 2.03 5.16
AGDD_005 221.5 159.4 163.08 3.68 0.57 0.05 1.93 1.21
AGDD_006 212.5 143.11 149.2 6.09 1.08 0.58 1.22 9.25
159 161.15 2.15 1.33 1.24 0.88 13.13
AGDD_007 220 Hole ended before interpreted mineralisation
AGDD_008 215.5 154.43 166.17 11.74 1.14 1.37 1.63 13.92
AGDD_009 140.5 112.83 117 4.17 1.35 2.10 0.89 16.81
AGDD_010 128.5 100.58 105.29 4.71 0.65 0.06 0.61 1.82
AGDD_011 257 68.24 72.92 4.68 0.67 1.01 0.99 8.22
AGDD_012 58.5 35.4 41.5 6.1 0.09 0.09 2.59 3.15
AGDD_013B 230.5 181.5 184.8 3.3 0.22 0.25 0.13 3.00
AGDD_014 83.1 61.7 64 2.3 1.34 1.10 7.11 17.78
AGDD_015 40 12.9 22.35 9.45 0.19 0.06 0.99 0.50
AGDD_016 130.5 103.25 105.7 2.45 1.38 0.50 2.70 11.74
Appendix F - JORC Table 1
Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data (Criteria in this section apply to all
succeeding sections).
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Sampling techniques · Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. cut channels, random chips, or · Trenching, diamond drilling (DD) and reverse circulation (RC)
specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the drilling was completed by GMCO from January to September 2022. The exploration
minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF work comprised 16 HQ size DD holes for 3,007 m. 19 RC holes for 1,169 m, and
instruments, etc.). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad 26 trenches of a total 1,046 m in length.
meaning of sampling.
· Sample intervals range from 0.3 m to 3.0 m for diamond drilling
· Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and trenching. RC holes were sampled in 1 m intervals except for ten instances
and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. of the first sample in the hole that was sampled in 2 m lengths. Typically,
1.0 m nominal length samples were taken in mineralised zones from the trenches
· Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to and DD holes, whereas longer samples were taken outside mineralised zones.
the Public Report. Sample lengths were varied according to lithology and/or mineralisation
intensity, honouring boundaries where possible. Longer samples of three metre
· In cases where 'industry standard' work has been done this would be lengths were taken a distance into the hangingwall or footwall.
relatively simple (e.g. 'reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m
samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire · The mineralised interval for all sample types was continuously
assay'). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there sampled from hangingwall to footwall, which included samples a short distance
is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or into the hangingwall and footwall.
mineralisation types (e.g. submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of
detailed information. · The RC sub-samples were collected using a rig mounted ⅛ riffle
splitter under the cyclone.
· Field samples (half core, channel sample chips and RC chip sample
split) were crushed to 70% passing 2 mm at the laboratory and then a 250 g
split was pulverised to 85% passing 75μm, from which a charge for fire assay
was prepared with AAS finish for gold. 4-acid digest with ICP-AES was used for
silver, copper, and zinc.
Drilling techniques · Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary · Diamond drilling techniques were all HQ (63.4mm core diameter)
air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc.) and details (e.g. core diameter, triple using double tube core barrels (HQ2) through the hangingwall lithologies.
or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit, or other type, Triple tube HQ drilling (HQ3) was used in the mineralised zones.
whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc.).
· Reverse circulation drilling used a 4.5 inch (11.43 cm) bit size.
Drill sample recovery · Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and · Recovered core was measured for every interval and the core
results assessed. recovery percentage was calculated.
· Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative · Calculated core recovery for each oxide state in the mineralised
nature of the samples. zone is as follows:
· Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and o Fresh: 99.8% - 16 drillhole intersections
whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of
fine/coarse material. o Transitional: no Intersections
o Oxide: 100% -two drillhole intersections
· HQ3 diameter core (with triple tube core barrels) was used in all
mineralised zones.
· Calculated RC mass recovery is in the order of 93%. The
calculation is based on density assumptions.
· No relationship was established between sample recovery and
grade.
Logging · Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and · All drillhole core and trench samples have been geologically
geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral logged. Geotechnical (RQD and core recovery) logging has been completed for
Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. all drillholes.
· Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or · Both quantitative (geotechnical logging of RQD and core recovery)
costean, channel, etc.) photography. and qualitative (lithology) logging was carried out. All core has been
photographed.
· The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.
· 100% of diamond core and trench sampling has been logged. Chip
logging of RC samples was competed for all holes.
Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation · If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core · Whole core was longitudinally cut in half using a core saw on
taken. site and then half cores were submitted for preparation at the ALS laboratory
in Jeddah, where material was crushed to 70% passing 2 mm, and a 250 g split
· If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc. and pulverised to 85% passing 75 μm for analysis.
whether sampled wet or dry.
· All sample material from each 1 m trench sample was sent to the
· For all sample types, the nature, quality, and appropriateness of the laboratory and then crushed, split and pulverised in the same manner as the
sample preparation technique. core samples.
· Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to · The RC sub-samples collected every metre from a ⅛ riffle
maximise representivity of samples. splitter at the rig were sent to the laboratory and then crushed, split and
pulverised in the same manner as the core samples.
· Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the
in-situ material collected, including for instance results for field · The nature, quality, and sample preparation techniques are
duplicate/second-half sampling. appropriate for all sample types.
· Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the · Field duplicates were taken at a rate of 1 in 20. These
material being sampled. comprised:
o RC chip sample duplicates taken from the remaining ⅞ of the sample using
a riffle splitter. Wet samples (at the base of transition zone) were
sun-dried, hand crushed and riffle split for duplicate sample preparation.
o Quarter core duplicates
o Trench sample duplicates.
· The RC field duplicates indicate high precision for Cu, Zn and Ag
with >90% of the duplicate pairs with half absolute relative difference
(HARD) of <10%. For Au, precision is acceptable with 96% of the duplicate
pairs with HARD of <20% and 65% of the duplicate pairs with HARD of
<10%.
· For the DD and trench field duplicate precision is >80% of the
duplicate pairs with HARD of <20%. Precision for Au in the trench
duplicates is poor, reflecting the expected high natural variability in the
oxide environment.
· Sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material
being sampled. The variability of gold silver, copper and zinc grades is
generally low in the fresh sulphide domain, however variability in gold grade
increases in the oxide environment where the most extreme gold assay returned
was 132.5 g/t. The higher gold variability in the trench data indicates that
larger samples may be more appropriate.
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests · The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and · Copper, zinc and silver were analysed at ALS Jeddah by 4-acid
laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or digest read with ICP-AES (Method Code ME-ICP61). High grade analyses were
total. completed where the initial assay returned values at the trigger-limit of
5,000 ppm for Cu, 8,000 ppm for Zn,75 ppm for Ag and 100 ppm for Au using
· For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc., method codes Cu-OG62, Zn-OG62, Ag-OG62 and Au-GRA22 respectively.
the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and
model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. · Gold was assayed using fire assay and read with AAS or with
gravimetric finish for over-limit.
· Nature of quality control procedures adopted (e.g. standards, blanks,
duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of · The methods of analysis involve near total digest and are
accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been established. standard methods that are applicable to the type of mineralisation at Al
Godeyer.
· The Al Godeyer QAQC programme includes blank, certified reference
material (CRM) and field duplicate samples at an insertion rate of
approximately 5% each.
· GMCO implemented a proactive approach to QAQC, whereby each batch
of results is examined immediately on receipt from the laboratory, any issues
are highlighted and corrective measures are implemented where necessary.
Monthly QAQC reports were created throughout the duration of the programme.
· Blank samples are certified blank (Au and Ag) or of trace grade
(Cu and Zn). Two certified blank samples were used; 8 of OREASC26d and 125 of
OREASC27d. The blanks revealed that no contamination was introduced during the
sample assay process.
· Nine different CRMs were used to monitor the accuracy of the Cu,
Zn, Au and Ag assays across the full target range of the Al Godeyer
mineralisation. These were sourced from OREAS and Geostats Pty Ltd. A total of
156 CRM assays were completed. The results of the CRM analysis demonstrate
that there was no overall assay bias for any elements, and failures (outside
±3SD) were rare.
· No pulp duplicates were completed, however, the RC field
duplicates indicated high precision for Cu, Zn and Ag with >90% of the
duplicate pairs with half absolute relative difference (HARD) of <10%. For
Au, precision was acceptable with 96% of the duplicate pairs with HARD of
<20% and 65% of the duplicate pairs with HARD of <10%. It is expected
that pulp duplicate precision will exceed that of the field duplicates.
· The results of the QAQC demonstrate that the assays are accurate
and precise with minimal contamination and that they are of sufficient
quality for use in Mineral Resource estimation with a high degree of
confidence.
Verification of sampling and assaying · The verification of significant intersections by either independent · Jeremy Witley of MSA completed a visit to the Al Godeyer project
or alternative company personnel. from 17 February 2023 to 21 February 2023. No drilling activities were taking
place at the time, however exploration procedures were explained and
· The use of twinned holes. demonstrated by the GMCO personnel. The drillhole collars and exposed gossan
were examined and their positions verified by hand-held GPS. A number of
· Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data diamond drill core intersections that covered the range of oxidation states
verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. and intensity of mineralisation at the project were examined. Although most of
the trenches had been rehabilitated, their existence was evident in the field.
· Discuss any adjustment to assay data.
· No verification twin drilling has been completed. RC drilling
into oxide material a short distance (10 m to 20 m) below the trenches
obtained similar mineralisation to that obtained in the trenches with
comparable gold and silver grades.
· The drillhole data are stored in a Datamine Fusion database. MSA
carried out validation checks on the database outputs, with only minimal
errors found that were corrected.
· No adjustments to assay data were made.
· No drillholes or trenches within the Mineral Resource area were
excluded from the grade estimate:
· Reconnaissance trench sampling completed on prospective geology
within the project area away from the Al Godeyer gossan (AGTR_017 to
AGTR_026) were not considered in this Mineral Resource.
Location of data points · Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar · The topographic survey for drillhole collars at Al Godeyer has
and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in been completed by using a Topcon ES-103 total station survey tool which
Mineral Resource estimation. provides a high degree of accuracy in terms of x, y, and z coordinates.
· Specification of the grid system used. · All trenches were surveyed using differential GPS or land
surveyor.
· Quality and adequacy of topographic control.
· All drillholes have been surveyed down-the hole by electronic
multishot (Reflex EZ-Trac), at 6 m spaced readings for the diamond drillholes
and 3 m spaced readings for the RC holes. The down-hole survey measurements
were examined and spurious readings removed prior to de-surveying the
drillholes.
· The grid system is WGS 84 / UTM zone 37.
· A topographic survey was completed by a GMCO surveyor using
Topcon ES-103 total station. This data was combined with a topographic surface
generated from orthorectified satellite imagery to provide good coverage of
the property. The resolution of topography-station points is considered to
better than 0.5 m, across the site, which is adequate for the project.
Data spacing and distribution · Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. · Trenches were excavated 100 m apart along the gossan outcrop.
· Whether the data spacing, and distribution is sufficient to establish · RC holes intersected the oxide / transitional mineralisation
the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral directly beneath the trenches and half-way between, resulting in a line of RC
Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied. drillhole intersections 50 m apart between 15 m and 30 m below surface.
· Whether sample compositing has been applied. · Several RC holes drilled into the sulphide portion. However, the
majority of the sulphide Mineral Resource is informed by a loose grid of
diamond drillholes approximately 50 m to 100 m apart.
· Drillhole spacing of approximately 50 m to 100 m apart is
sufficient to establish grade continuity for the Mineral Resource up to an
Inferred level of confidence in the oxide portion. The lower variability
evident in the sulphide portion allows for a wider spacing of approximately
100 m for Inferred Mineral Resources.
· The Al Godeyer deposit is characterised by strong geological
continuity over a distances of more than 1 km along strike, as observed by
semi-continuous gossan outcrops, and widely spaced drilling of around hundred
metres is sufficient to confirm this.
· One metre composites were created using length and density
(assigned) weighting to create equal sample support for Mineral Resource
estimation.
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure · Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of · Trenches are approximately horizontal resulting in close to true
possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the thickness for the sub-vertical dipping mineralisation.
deposit type.
· Diamond drillholes were collared at surface at inclinations of
· If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the 50° or 55°, and RC holes at 50° providing intersection angles with the
orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a mineralisation that are generally more than 40° to 45° as the drillhole
sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material. inclinations have a tendency to rise with depth.
· The orientation of the drilling is not considered to have
introduced any material bias to the drillhole samples or block model estimate.
Sample security · The measures taken to ensure sample security. · Transport of core, RC chips and channel sample chips from
drill/trench site to core processing was supervised by GMCO personnel. Samples
were driven to the analytical laboratory in Jeddah by a GMCO driver. Sampled
half and quarter core is kept in stacked core boxes at GMCO's core storage
area at Hawiah.
· Reject pulps are collected by a GMCO driver and kept in GMCO's
storage area and stored in sealed plastic drums.
· The Al Godeyer core and residual sample material is kept at the
Hawiah exploration facility, which is fenced and access controlled by security
guards at the entrance.
Audits or reviews · The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. · MSA carried out a review of the sampling techniques and inspected
the sampled core. The CP considers that the sampling techniques are
appropriate for the nature of the material and mineralisation style at Al
Godeyer.
Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results (Criteria listed in the preceding
section also apply to this section).
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Mineral tenement and land tenure status · Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including · GMCO is a joint venture partnership between ARTAR and KEFI Gold
agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, and Copper. The Exploration Licence is held by ARTAR, under the terms of the
partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, GMCO Joint Venture agreement. ARTAR currently has a 73.2% share of the
wilderness or national park and environmental settings. Project, with the remainder (26.8%) owned by KEFI. The Exploration Licence was
granted by order of the Ministry of Energy, Industry and Mineral Resources and
· The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with Deputy Ministry of Mineral Resources of Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The Licence
any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area. was awarded in 14(th) December 2021. The Licence is due to expire on 21(st)
October 2026.
· Exploration licences in KSA can be renewed and held for a period
of up to 15 years if all financial, technical, and environmental commitments
are met
Exploration done by other parties · Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. · Modern exploration at the Project commenced in 1987 when the
Bureau de Recherches Géologiques et Minières ("BRGM") undertook a trench
sampling program at the Al Godeyer prospect, which followed up on the results
of earlier (1986-1987) rock chip sampling and mapping campaigns. GMCO
subsequently acquired the Project in 2021. No drilling took place prior to
GMCO ownership.
Geology · Deposit type, geological setting, and style of mineralisation. · The Al Godeyer volcanogenic massive sulphide (VMS) deposit is
located on the western limb of a regional-scale antiform in the Group 3
epiclastics of the Wadi Bidah Mineral Belt (WBMB).
· VMS deposits form at or slightly under the sea floor by the
exhalation of metal rich plumes and subsequent settling on, or replacement of,
the fine grained sediments. They are tabular in nature and characterised by
strong geological continuity over 100s of metres to several km in their
undisturbed form.
· The Al Godeyer deposit is expressed at surface by a northwest to
southeast trending gossan that forms a slight ridgeline exposed over a length
of approximately 1,000 m, with a thickness that typically varies from 2 m to
13 m. The gossan outcrop strikes approximately west to east for a further 300
m in the southern area, and a fault has been tentatively interpreted to
explain the sudden strike change. The rock package comprises a suite of
gossanous ex-massive sulphides, chert breccias and banded iron stones enclosed
by altered greenschists. The deposit has been subject to varying degrees of
supergene alteration as a result of groundwater interactions.
· The deposit comprises three oxidation domains; oxide, transition
and fresh. The oxide and transition domain typically show supergene gold
enrichment and copper and zinc leaching, although copper enrichment from
supergene processes is evident at the base of the transitional domain. The
fresh mineralised domain is dominantly pyritic stratiform massive sulphide
containing fine grained copper sulphides (chalcopyrite) and zinc sulphide
(sphalerite) and is characterised by low base and precious metal grade
variability. The central portion of the sulphide deposit contains the thickest
mineralisation that is elevated in Cu, Zn and Ag, which extends 300 m to 400 m
along strike and 200 m below surface.
Drill hole Information · A summary of all information material to the understanding of the · Exploration results not being reported.
exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for
all Material drill holes: · The exclusion of detailed information lists pertaining to the
exploration results would not detract from the understanding of the Mineral
- easting and northing of the drill hole collar Resource in this report.
- elevation or RL (Reduced Level - elevation above sea level in metres)
of the drill hole collar
- dip and azimuth of the hole
- down hole length and interception depth
- hole length.
· If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that
the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the
understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why
this is the case.
Data aggregation methods · In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, · Exploration results not being reported.
maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (e.g. cutting of high grades) and
cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated.
· Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high-grade
results and longer lengths of low-grade results, the procedure used for such
aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations
should be shown in detail.
· The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values
should be clearly stated.
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths · These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of · The mineralisation is typically sub-vertically dipping.
Exploration Results.
· Trenches are horizontal resulting in near true thickness
· If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole intersections.
angle is known, its nature should be reported.
· Diamond drillholes were collared at surface at inclinations of
· If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there 50° or 55° and RC holes at 50° providing intersection angles with the
should be a clear statement to this effect (e.g. 'down hole length, true width mineralisation that are generally more than 45° to 40° as the drillhole
not known'). inclinations have a tendency to rise with depth.
Diagrams · Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of · Exploration results not being reported.
intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported.
These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar
locations and appropriate sectional views.
Balanced reporting · Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not · Exploration results not being reported.
practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or
widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration
Results.
Other substantive exploration data · Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be · There is no other meaningful and material exploration information
reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical to disclose.
survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples - size and method of
treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical
and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.
Further work · The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g. tests for lateral · Further work planned for the project is the advancement towards
extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). various levels of feasibility study. This is in conjunction with ongoing
metallurgical test work. The current focus of the project is on studies to
· Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, demonstrate the techno-economic feasibility of the project as a satellite
including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, deposit to the nearby Hawiah Project.
provided this information is not commercially sensitive.
· Potential exists to expand the sulphide portion of the Mineral
Resource at depth with additional drilling.
Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources (Criteria listed in
section 1, and where relevant in section 2, also apply to this section).
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Database integrity · Measures taken to ensure that data has not been corrupted by, for · Data is electronically logged using "toughbooks". Laboratory
example, transcription or keying errors, between its initial collection and results are delivered electronically and transferred into the Fusion database.
its use for Mineral Resource estimation purposes. Grades are checked by the project geologist to ensure that they are consistent
with observations made on the samples.
· Data validation procedures used.
· MSA performed a number of database validation checks on the GMCO
digital sample data and found no material issues in the final database. These
include checks for completeness of data, unexpected positional data, grades
outside of expected ranges, and gaps and overlaps in the sampling data.
Site visits · Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and the · Jeremy Witley of MSA completed a visit to the Al Godeyer project
outcome of those visits. from 17 February 2023 to 21 February 2023. No drilling activities were taking
place at the time, however exploration procedures were explained and
· If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case. demonstrated by the GMCO personnel. The drillhole collars and exposed gossan
were examined and their positions verified by hand-held GPS. A number of
diamond drill core intersections that covered the range of oxidation states
and intensity of mineralisation at the project were examined. Although most of
the trenches had been rehabilitated, their existence was evident in the field.
Geological interpretation · Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of) the geological · Mineralisation wireframes have been defined primarily based on
interpretation of the mineral deposit. lithology logging, elevated copper and gold grades (relevant to zones of
anticipated grade enrichment or depletion, as described below) and visual
· Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made. assessments of geological and grade continuity. Selection of mineralised
intervals for oxide, transition, and fresh zones was typically based on
· The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on Mineral visually distinguishable boundaries between the mineralised zones and
Resource estimation. background host rock, with lower grade samples and inter-burden incorporated
where necessary to honour geological continuity.
· The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral Resource
estimation. · For the oxide domain, mineralisation was primarily modelled based
on a combination of gossan, saccharoidal silica and haematitic chert
· The factors affecting continuity both of grade and geology. lithologies (i.e., weathering products of the massive sulphide), relative
enrichment of gold and depletion in copper and zinc, and typical red/ orange
colour observed in core photos. Elevated gold values in the immediate
greenschist hangingwall and footwall were also included where contiguous with
the main mineralisation.
· In the transition zone, mineralisation was mainly modelled based
on massive sulphide logging and core observations, where transition material
typically has a dark-grey to black colour (which clearly contrasts with the
oxide zone). The base of the transition zone is predominantly defined by the
observed sulphide state, where dark grey altered sulphides become yellow
unoxidised massive pyrite.
· Within the fresh rock, mineralisation was primarily modelled
based on massive sulphide logging, which correlates closely with Cu-Zn-Au-Ag
mineralisation. Hangingwall and footwall contacts are generally sharp and
visually distinct with some banded and semi-massive sulphide close to the
contact in places.
Dimensions · The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource expressed as · The Al Godeyer deposit is expressed at surface by a northwest to
length (along strike or otherwise), plan width, and depth below surface to the southeast trending gossan that forms a slight ridgeline exposed over a length
upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource. of approximately 1,000 m, with a thickness that typically varies from 2 m to
13 m. The gossan outcrop strikes approximately west to east for a further 300
m in the southern area, and a fault has been tentatively interpreted to
explain the sudden strike change.
· The mineralisation was modelled as a tabular layer that
bifurcates in places.
· The central portion of the sulphide deposit is the thickest and
contains mineralisation elevated in Cu, Zn and Ag, which extends 300 m to
400 m along strike and extends to at least 200 m below surface. The northwest
and southeast areas were not drilled below the oxide and transition domains
and the Mineral Resource therefore only extends to approximately 30 m below
surface in these areas. The deposit is open at depth along the entire strike
length.
Estimation and modelling techniques · The nature and appropriateness of the estimation technique(s) applied · The Mineral Resource estimation followed the following process:
and key assumptions, including treatment of extreme grade values, domaining,
interpolation parameters and maximum distance of extrapolation from data o GMCO modelled the mineralisation extents and oxidation states using
points. If a computer assisted estimation method was chosen include a Leapfrog Geo software. MSA accepted the mineralisation models following an
description of computer software and parameters used. interactive review process during which slight adjustments to the original
model were made.
· The availability of check estimates, previous estimates and/or mine
production records and whether the Mineral Resource estimate takes appropriate o The validated drillhole data were selected from within the wireframes by
account of such data. mineralisation state. Basic statistical evaluation was carried out on the raw
data, including scatterplots by oxidation state to establish relationships
· The assumptions made regarding recovery of by-products. between variables and trend analysis to establish quasi-stationary zones.
· Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade variables of o The selected data was composited to 1 m intervals using length and density
economic significance (e.g. sulphur for acid mine drainage characterisation). (assigned by rock type) weighting.
· In the case of block model interpolation, the block size in relation o Top caps were defined based on examination of histograms, cumulative log
to the average sample spacing and the search employed. probability plots and mean-variance plots. The outliers were then examined
spatially to assess whether they formed a high grade sub-domain and whether a
· Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining units. top-cap should be applied.
· Any assumptions about correlation between variables o The data for each estimation domain was selected using various soft and
hard domain boundaries between oxidation states and then the defined top-caps
· Description of how the geological interpretation was used to control were applied to the selected domain data.
the resource estimates.
o Variograms were modelled with normal scores transformed data for each
· Discussion of basis for using or not using grade cutting or capping. element. The oxide and transition domains were combined. There were
insufficient data in the sulphide zone to create robust variograms, so the
· The process of validation, the checking process used, the comparison average Hawiah variograms were used with modifications for the different
of model data to drill hole data, and use of reconciliation data if available. orientation of the mineralisation.
o The primary direction is horizontally along strike for the oxide domains
and plunging 50° to the northwest within the steeply dipping plane of
mineralisation for the fresh domains.
o The oxide domain variogram ranges were modelled for Au and Ag at 115 m and
185 m in the primary (strike) direction, 27 m and 33 m in the down-dip
direction and 4 m and 14 m in the across strike direction, respectively. In
the fresh domain, variogram ranges applied from Hawiah are between 115 m and
265 m in the major direction, 115 to 180 in the semi-major direction, with
short across strike ranges from 4 m to 7 m.
o The block model was rotated by 49° into the dominant strike direction.
o The three dimensional solid models were filled with parent cells with
dimensions of 12.5 mY (strike) by 2 mX (across strike) by 5 mZ (dip).
Sub-cells to a minimum parent cell fraction of ¼ Y (strike) ⅛, (across
strike and ⅛ Z (dip) of the parent cell were created to closely fit the
solid wireframe model along the edges.
o The dip and dip direction of each model cell was estimated for use in the
"Dynamic Anisotropy" process that modifies the search ellipse according to
local variations in dip and strike.
o The boundary conditions for each oxidation state were assessed for each
element depending on the observed grade patterns near the contacts and the
impact of the oxidation profile on each element:
o For copper and silver, a hard boundary was used between the oxide and
transition zone. The transition zone allowed samples from 20 m into the fresh
zone, and the fresh zone allowed samples 5 m into the transition zone.
o For zinc, the oxide-transition boundary was treated as a soft boundary
whereby samples could be sourced equally from both domains. The
transition-fresh boundary was treated as a hard domain as zinc grades
immediately increase as this boundary is crossed.
o For gold, the oxide-transition boundary was treated as a soft boundary
whereby samples could be sourced equally from both domains. The transition
zone allowed samples from the oxide and 20 m into the fresh zone, and the
fresh zone allowed samples 5 m into the transition zone.
o A high grade domain with a 50° plunge to the north was modelled in the
fresh domain for Cu, Zn and Ag to avoid spreading high grades away from the
well mineralised core of the deposit. Soft boundaries were used that allowed
samples from the high- or low-grade domain 50 m either side of the domain
boundary to estimate blocks within each domain.
o Cu, Zn, Au, and Ag grade were interpolated into the block model using
ordinary kriging using the back transformed variogram model data:
o Search parameters selected data within the modelled variogram range for
each element, oxide domain and spatial domain (where relevant). A second
search 1.5 times the variogram range selected samples where the minimum number
was not selected from within the variogram range. A third search 3 times the
variogram range selected samples where the minimum number was not selected in
the first two passes. Third pass estimates inform isolated blocks not
estimated in the first two searches and are of low confidence.
o For the oxide and transitional zone, a minimum of 8 and a maximum of 24
one metre composites were used for first pass estimation, a minimum of 8 and a
maximum of 20 one metre composites were used for second pass estimation, and a
minimum of 3 and a maximum of 5 one metre composites were used for third pass
estimation.
o For the fresh zone. a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 12 one metre
composites were used for first pass and second pass estimation, and a minimum
of 2 and a maximum of 12 one metre composites were used for third pass
estimation.
o A maximum of five composite samples were allowed from a single drillhole
for oxide and transitional and three for fresh.
o The estimated block grades were examined relative to the sample composites
using visual, statistical and swath plot (sectional) validation techniques.
o Density was estimated as follows:
o Density was assigned a constant value of 2.15 t/m3 for oxide. This was by
applying Hawiah measured oxide densities to the lithologies in the Al Godeyer
trench logging, with a 15% discount on the gossan density to account for the
less massive sulphide at Al Godeyer and a 5% cavity factor. The theoretical
density derived from the RC weights is also 2.15 t/m3 indicating the
potential for the assigned density to be conservative, as some losses are
expected in RC drilling.
o For the fresh domain, the mean measured fresh density from core was
assigned to the massive sulphide and a mean density for the remaining group of
lithologies (inter-burden) within the mineralised envelope was assigned by
logging interval. The data were then composited to 1 m intervals. Density was
estimated using inverse distance to the power of 3 (IDW3) with a search
ellipse of 100 mY by 200 mZ that allowed for three samples from across the
load with a minimum of four and eight samples in total. This was reduced to
two and twelve in the third search.
o As no density values were collected for transitional (no DD
intersections), the ratio between fresh and transitional at Hawiah was applied
to the Al Godeyer fresh mean density values to derive transitional density
data. The data were then composited to 1 m intervals. Density was estimated
using IDW3 with a search ellipse of 55 mY by 20 mZ, that allowed for five
samples from across the load with a minimum of eight and sixteen samples in
total. This was reduced to three and five in the third search. A 5% void
factor was then applied to transition domain model blocks.
· No check estimates were carried out.
· No by-products have been estimated as part of this MRE.
· No deleterious elements have been estimated as part of this MRE.
· Block dimensions reflect ¼ the average drillhole spacing near
surface to fit local variations of dip and strike while reflecting the grade
variability across the modelled mineralised domains.
· Selective mining units have not been modelled as part of this
MRE.
· Slight correlation was found between the estimated variables
during raw binomial statistical analysis. Estimation search parameters were
aligned between variables within each domain.
· No reconciliation data are available.
Moisture · Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural · Tonnages were estimated on a dry basis.
moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content.
Cut-off parameters · The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters · A Whittle optimised pit shell, using an assumption of maximum
applied. open-pit depth irrespective of potential underground mining, was used to
report open-pit Mineral Resources.
· The Whittle optimisation was based on the following assumed
technical parameters:
o Metal Price: Cu 9,350 USD/t, Zn 3,300 USD/t, Au 1,820 USD/oz, Ag 26
USD/oz.
o Dilution 10%, mining losses 5%.
o Concentrator recovery via an Albion circuit: Cu 90%, Zn 90%, Au 85%, Ag
60% No recovery of zinc and copper in oxide. Metallurgical factors based on
initial metallurgical test-work.
o Smelter recovery/payability: Cu 96.5%, Zn 83.5%. Au Dore - Au 99.5%, Ag
99.6%.
o Pit slope angle: Fresh 56°, Transition 51° and Oxide: 44°.
o Mining cost: open pit oxide 2.2 USD/t, open pit transition and fresh 2.4
USD/t. Cost adjustment for open-pit depth USD0.004/ vertical m.
o Transport cost from Al Godeyer pit to Hawiah plant 1.125 USD/t and a
rehandle cost of 0.7 USD/t.
o Total Processing cost: oxide 13.86 USD/t, transition and fresh 21.4 USD/t.
o G&A: 5.6 USD/t ore.
· A net smelter return (NSR) calculation was carried out by GMCO
that was reviewed and accepted as reasonable by MSA. The cut-off grade was
applied on a NSR basis: open-pit transition and fresh ore 31.2 USD/t, open-pit
oxide ore 23.5 USD/t.
· NSR was calculated for each block model cell:
o Oxide = (Cu %*0)+(Zn%*0)+(Au g/t 49.4732 )+(Ag g/t*0.4868)
o Transition and Fresh = (Cu %*76.5870)+(Zn%*20.1118)+(Au g/t *49.4732)+(Ag
g/t*0.4868).
Mining factors or assumptions · Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum mining · Open pit mining will be used.
dimensions and internal (or, if applicable, external) mining dilution. It is
always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects
for eventual economic extraction to consider potential mining methods, but the
assumptions made regarding mining methods and parameters when estimating
Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this
should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions
made.
Metallurgical factors or assumptions · The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding metallurgical · Copper and zinc are expected to be recovered by an Albion process
amenability. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining at the planned Hawiah plant 12 km away.
reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential
metallurgical methods, but the assumptions regarding metallurgical treatment · No copper or zinc will be recovered from the oxide zone.
processes and parameters made when reporting Mineral Resources may not always
be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an
explanation of the basis of the metallurgical assumptions made.
Environmental factors or assumptions · Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process residue · MSA is unaware of any environmental factors which would preclude
disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining the reporting of Mineral Resources.
reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider the
potential environmental impacts of the mining and processing operation. While
at this stage the determination of potential environmental impacts,
particularly for a greenfields project, may not always be well advanced, the
status of early consideration of these potential environmental impacts should
be reported. Where these aspects have not been considered this should be
reported with an explanation of the environmental assumptions made.
Bulk density · Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis for the · For oxide density: three "mega-trenches" were excavated at Hawiah
assumptions. If determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, the frequency into the oxide zone to expose the full gossan profile from hangingwall to
of the measurements, the nature, size, and representativeness of the samples. footwall at a depth of between 4 m and 5 m below surface. Samples of each
gossan lithology were taken for density measurements, using both a volumetric
· The bulk density for bulk material must have been measured by methods method ("calliper method") and by weighing in air and water (following
that adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc.), moisture and wax-sealing). The two methods gave similar results and the average of the two
differences between rock and alteration zones within the deposit. was used for each lithology. Mapping of the Al Godeyer trench sidewalls was
completed and the Hawiah densities were applied to estimate in-situ bulk
· Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used in the evaluation density for the oxide material. A 15% "sulphide factor" was applied to the
process of the different materials. gossan densities as an allowance for the lower sulphide concentration in the
massive sulphide at Al Godeyer than Hawiah. A cavity factor of 5% was applied
resulting in a density of 2.15 t/m(3) for oxide.
· Density measurements were made on drillhole core during the 2022
diamond drilling programme. The Archimedes principle of weight in air versus
weight in water was used on pieces of core typically measuring 10 cm to 15 cm
in length.
· For the fresh domain, the mean measured core density was
calculated and assigned to the massive sulphide, and a mean density was
calculated for the remaining group of lithologies (inter-burden) within the
mineralised zone. Density was assigned by logging interval and then composited
to 1 m intervals and estimated using inverse distance to the power of 3
(IDW3).
· As there were no core density measurements for transitional, the
ratio between fresh and transitional measured values from Hawiah was applied
to the Al Godeyer fresh values. The same estimation approach for the
transitional domain as the fresh domain was then used. A 5% void factor was
applied to the transition domain model blocks.
Classification · The basis for the classification of the Mineral Resources into · The Mineral Resource was classified as Inferred. In classifying
varying confidence categories. the Mineral Resource, MSA considered confidence in the data, geological
continuity, geological model confidence and grade continuity.
· Whether appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors
(i.e. relative confidence in tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input · The data are generally of high quality:
data, confidence in continuity of geology and metal values, quality, quantity,
and distribution of the data). o Core recovery is acceptable in all domains. RC weights indicate good
recovery and minimal cavities.
· Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person's view
of the deposit. o Appropriate sampling methodology was used and logging is of acceptable
quality.
o The magnitude of the trench sample grades was confirmed by the reverse
circulation sample grades, as local trends and high-grade zones were reflected
in both data sets.
o The QAQC of the assay data demonstrates acceptable accuracy and minimal
contamination. Field duplicates confirm that the RC sub-sampling is
appropriate and indicate good laboratory precision.
o All trenches and drillholes were accurately surveyed.
o The density data are globally applied to the oxide zone based on data from
a nearby deposit (Hawiah), trench mapping and various assumptions. Theoretical
density calculation for the RC recovery validates the assumed values. There
are no direct density data for transitional domain. Fresh densities are based
on core measurements and were interpolated.
· The geological model is robust and geological continuity is good:
o The Al Godeyer VMS deposit exhibits geological continuity on a scale of
over 1 km on strike and has been demonstrated by drilling to continue to at
least 200 m down-dip in the central portion.
o Narrowing of the mineralised unit occurs towards the model edges, where
risk is higher.
o A single fault has been interpreted based on a change in strike. Other
faults are likely to occur, which are unlikely to be large and to result in
high geological risk.
o The interpretation of the oxide zones is sound and based on a
combination of visual and chemical factors. Further drilling is required in
the transitional area to refine the contact positions.
· Grade continuity:
o Variograms have been modelled for the combined oxide-transitional domain
at Al Godeyer and applied from Hawiah for fresh.
o The oxide variography demonstrates continuity similar to the drillhole and
trench spacing.
o The drillhole spacing is closer than the variogram range in the central
portion of the fresh mineralisation. However, the total amount of fresh
intercepts is insufficient to confirm directions of grade trends.
o Subtle grade trends occur that are aligned with expected near horizontal
orientations and strike direction in the oxide and transition domains where
oxidation is a major control.
· Considering the aforementioned factors, the classification was
applied as follows:
o All oxide and transitional mineralisation was classified as Inferred,
extended from trenches along strike to the mapped limits (65 m in the
northeast and 20 m in the southwest).
o Fresh mineralisation was classified as Inferred within the drillhole grid
to approximately 100 m spacing. The Inferred area was extrapolated 60 m from
the nearest intersection. This approach is necessitated by the rapid changes
in zinc and sulphide grade from the central high-grade zone outwards.
· This classification was prepared by, and reflects the views of,
the Competent Person.
Audits or reviews · The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates. · Members of the GMCO geological team have reviewed and accepted
this estimate.
Discussion of relative accuracy/ confidence · Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and confidence · The Al Godeyer Mineral Resource has reached a level of confidence
level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach or procedure deemed consistent with that of a scoping study. Infill drilling, additional density
appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the application of data and deeper exposure of the oxide zone near surface will be required to
statistical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of bring portions of the Mineral Resource to Indicated confidence.
the resource within stated confidence limits, or, if such an approach is not
deemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors that could affect · Despite block model estimation having been carried out, Inferred
the relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate. Mineral Resources should be considered global in nature and not suitable for
mine planning to derive Ore Reserves.
· The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local
estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be · No production data are available.
relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should include
assumptions made and the procedures used.
· These statements of relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate
should be compared with production data, where available.
This information is provided by RNS, the news service of the London Stock Exchange. RNS is approved by the Financial Conduct Authority to act as a Primary Information Provider in the United Kingdom. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution of this information may apply. For further information, please contact
rns@lseg.com (mailto:rns@lseg.com)
or visit
www.rns.com (http://www.rns.com/)
.
RNS may use your IP address to confirm compliance with the terms and conditions, to analyse how you engage with the information contained in this communication, and to share such analysis on an anonymised basis with others as part of our commercial services. For further information about how RNS and the London Stock Exchange use the personal data you provide us, please see our
Privacy Policy (https://www.lseg.com/privacy-and-cookie-policy)
. END UPDFZGGDKZGGFZMRecent news on KEFI Gold and Copper
See all newsREG - Kefi Gold and Copper - New Member Completes Tulu Kapi Project Syndicate
AnnouncementREG - Kefi Gold and Copper - Corporate Update
AnnouncementREG - Kefi Gold and Copper - GMCO/ARTAR-Hancock wins tender for Saudi Arabia EL
AnnouncementREG - Kefi Gold and Copper - Co-Lenders’ Boards and Committees Approve Project
AnnouncementREG - Kefi Gold and Copper - Status of Tulu Kapi Finance Closing Process
Announcement